I guess it's not a secret that Intel isn't happy that NVidia isn't giving them SLI for their X38 etc. chipsets, but really should they care that much considering the minscule fraction of people using two GPUs? Well it appears that they care enough to totally screw over NVidia by changing their q9650s at the last minute so that they don't work on the NVidia 680i 780i chipsets. The new bios was designed to work with the engineering samples that NVidia was provided, then PRESTO the retail/OEM chips come off the line with a built in sabotage for NVidea. Enthusiasts are all already migrating away from NVidia chipsets in droves so that they can use their new superchip.

Some might say tit-for-tat on this, but the thing is that NVidia has every right to deny the licence of SLI to Intel, but what intel did to them is ILLEGAL. If you ask me, people should be returning their q9650s, and switch to AMD- get some competition back in this game and the industry monsters will be forced to go back to developing good products instead of petty espionage and undermining.

Isnt there some sort of regulatory body to lodge complaints with? I think Intel is already in trouble with the EU for questionable behavior (related to stealing the server market from AMD). Ill see if can affix a link later.

"This litigation follows a recent ruling from the Fair Trade Commission of Japan (JFTC), which found that Intel abused its monopoly power to exclude fair and open competition, violating Section 3 of Japan's Antimonopoly Act. These findings reveal that Intel deliberately engaged in illegal business practices to stop AMD's increasing market share by imposing limitations on Japanese PC manufacturers. Intel did not contest these charges.The European Commission has stated that it is pursuing an investigation against Intel for similar possible antitrust violations and is cooperating with the Japanese authorities."You don't have to take our word for it when it comes to Intel's abuses; the Japanese government condemned Intel for its exclusionary and illegal misconduct," said Thomas M. McCoy, AMD executive vice president, legal affairs and chief administrative officer. "We encourage regulators around the world to take a close look at the market failure and consumer harm Intel's business practices are causing in their nations. Intel maintains illegal monopoly profits at the expense of consumers and computer manufacturers, whose margins are razor thin. Now is the time for consumers and the industry worldwide to break free from the abusive Intel monopoly."

I guess it's not a secret that Intel isn't happy that NVidia isn't giving them SLI for their X38 etc. chipsets, but really should they care that much considering the minscule fraction of people using two GPUs? Well it appears that they care enough to totally screw over NVidia by changing their q9650s at the last minute so that they don't work on the NVidia 680i 780i chipsets. The new bios was designed to work with the engineering samples that NVidia was provided, then PRESTO the retail/OEM chips come off the line with a built in sabotage for NVidea. Enthusiasts are all already migrating away from NVidia chipsets in droves so that they can use their new superchip.

Some might say tit-for-tat on this, but the thing is that NVidia has every right to deny the licence of SLI to Intel, but what intel did to them is ILLEGAL. If you ask me, people should be returning their q9650s, and switch to AMD- get some competition back in this game and the industry monsters will be forced to go back to developing good products instead of petty espionage and undermining.

First of all, NVidia's being stupid. They're trying to play Intel against AMD.... just like DELL is with AMD/Intel. I'm not sure why you say this is illegal on Intel's part... but yeah.... revenge motivates... and i would likely do the same thing... if i were in Intel's shoes. The minute the AMD/ATI merger rumours started... this action was predicted, and i'm surprised Intel waited so long to drop the hammer. I don't know... maybe Intel plays dirty..moral call i guess.. but, hey, they're in the biz to make money(then chips)...nothing more/less. How is this any different than what Apple has been doing all along(and even now, that they're using Intel CPU's)... only allowing OSX(etc.)to run on their HW?

Not allowing a license is very different than allowing it, then changing the product as soon as the competition develops a platform for it to deliberately sabotage their sales- that's an illegal competitive practice but unfortunately hard to prove as they can make up all kinds of reasons why they "needed" to change it at the last minute.

And there's no point in NVidia trying to find ways to pit Intel against AMD because AMD is not a threat to Intel now and Intel knows it.